Search

Rachel Maddow defends her MSNBC counterpart Keith Olbermann and lays waste to the false equivalence that MSNBC is to the Democratic Party as Fox News is to the Republican Party.

[HTML1]

Pretending that MSNBC’s analysts and evening hosts do not have a liberal bias is not my point, they clearly do. However, Fox has proven in the past 18 months that it is not an actual news organization, but rather the media arm of the Republican Party.

13 Responses to “Maddow on Olbermann and False Equivalence”

Keith Olberman got suspended for no good reason. I think NBC honcho Phil Griffin was hanging Olberman out to dry and trying to earn some brownie points with GE’s new owner Comcast and with the new republican House of Reps.
Clearly Phil Griffin knows better than anybody that what Olberman did pales in comparison with the outright prostitution-propaganda that masquerades as “news’ across the street from 30 Rock at Fox.
Keith Olberman broke the NBC rules and could have been fined or disciplined in some other way. But no, Phil Griffin wanted to make a high profile example of him. Why, if not to engender good will amongst the right wing.

Well screw Phil Griffin. Guess what? I think the progressives are not the push-overs that Mr. Griffin thinks they are. I predict that millions of Americans will stop watching the NBC Nightly News and other NBC programs until Keith Olberman is reinstated. I sent Griffin an email (phil.griffin@nbcunilcom) and told him that I would not watch WGRZ news in Buffalo or any other NBC show if Olberman is not reinstated. That’s no sacrifice. Their prime time lineup is mush anyway. No offense to the local affiliate, WGRZ, but is Griffin wants to play hardball, the viewers can too.

Not all MSNBC talent have a ‘liberal’ bias. Every morning Joe Scarborough uses his “Morning Joe” platform on MSNBC to criticize the President and Democrats for 3 hours. Phil Griffin is Scarborough’s boss. Phil Griffin is a hypocrite. Fuck him. Two can play that game. Stop watching NBC Nightly News and WGRZ News.

Maddow, as usual, is sounding off in an attempt to support the progressive agenda – which is her right. However, it has nothing to do with Olberman’s suspension. He was suspended for clearly violating his employer’s rules. Her point that MSNBC is not a political organization splits hairs that mean nothing. One does not need to donate money in order to be political.

The whole canard that MSNBC is not a political operation, but only a news operation is laughable. There has never been such a thing since the beginning of the republic. How could there be such a thing? A news organization always takes on the air of the majority of its pundits. I find nothing wrong with that, it’s just natural, a competition of ideas. Like Mike said, “One does not need to donate money in order to be political.”, MSNBC has clearly been political because of the views of most of its opinion makers, for the most part it is the Left/Progressive channel.

I think Rachel Maddow’s point was that MSNBC prohibits donations and therefore are not a ‘political operation’, but Fox clearly is. Murdock donates millions to the GOP, he hires people who are posturing to run for the Presidency, his so-called ‘news’ is propaganda. Fox is an arm of the republican party. Their White House credential should be withdrawn.

And BTW, Olberman is back on the air. NSNBC received 300,000 angry protests and relented.

Maddow’s rant is pathetic and nothing but sour grapes due to the ratings dominance of Fox News. In the grand scheme of things MNSBC is irrelevant and Maddow and her ilk know that. BobbyCat wrote “Two can play that game. Stop watching NBC Nightly News and WGRZ News.” All I have to say is LOL does anyone watch NBC news programing anymore?

The Ed Schultz segment which makes up much of the video is interesting. You know why? I remember watching it and the segment featured a liberal group that was targeting incumbent Democrat Blanche Lincoln in the Arkansas primary.

The discussion centered around whether it made sense for liberals to invest resources into targeting centrist Democrats in a year in which a massive anti-incumbency wave fueled by an opposition party. They very carefully cut out the consistent criticism that Schultz gave to the Bold Progressives guy for constantly trying to get his website out. It was actually comical.

Also, the following segment featured Blanche Lincoln’s people and Third Way Democrats doing the exact same thing. At the end of the segment, Schultz complained that it’s almost impossible to interview people without them trying to market themselves. The lesson learned? Selective editing is fun!

Also, Rachel’s piece spent more time discussing how Fox hosts and analysts personally donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to political candidates, how Fox sponsored and empowered the Tea Party movement, how Fox itself made a several million dollar donation to the RNC and the RGA, how Fox analysts appeared at political rallies in support of candidates, specifically endorsed candidates on their websites and operated as campaign affiliates for Republicans.

If you’d like to draw some equivalence there, I’d tell you that it’s actually confirmation bias. But, you guys go and have a super day!

@ Chris – Your last paragraph makes the point – its all confirmation bias. In fact, that’s why those who watch any of this do so in the first place. My problem is the stones in the glass house – the one Ed Schultz section you comment on makes up some of the video, but not all. And in any case, the sins of both MSNBC and FOX are a matter of degree, not type. As we have discussed, the problem is actually FOX’s ability to set the agenda, not any of the money or viewership. MSNBC is populated by hosts (Maddow, Schultz) who tried to do the exact same thing in reverse (Air America). That doesn’t make them saintly martyrs, just failures.

“And in any case, the sins of both MSNBC and FOX are a matter of degree, not type”

Then you are delusional. As you ignored the actual substance of Chris’s point to reiterate your own. Maybe you should read it again.

“Also, Rachel’s piece spent more time discussing how Fox hosts and analysts personally donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to political candidates, how Fox sponsored and empowered the Tea Party movement, how Fox itself made a several million dollar donation to the RNC and the RGA, how Fox analysts appeared at political rallies in support of candidates, specifically endorsed candidates on their websites and operated as campaign affiliates for Republicans.”

This thread, and the ridiculous idea that MSNBC (which has Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, Andrea Mitchell, Chris Mathews, etc. etc.) is in any way the liberal equivalent of Fox, segues nicely into the new thread on the Big Lie.